Article 30 – A citizen petition looking to repeal the drinking water in single-serving polyethylene terephthalate bottles bylaw failed to pass after a counted vote.

The official teller count was 621 people in favor of repealing the bylaw and 687 opposed.

Jean Hill, lead citizen petitioner for Article 32 – the Drinking Water in Single-serving PET Bottles Bylaw, which passed at last year’s Town Meeting 403-364, said on Thursday morning how happy she was about the outcome of the vote.

"I’m just so relieved," Hill, 85, said. "It was pretty close. I was so stressed out when they were counting. I was almost in tears.”

Robin Garrison, lead petitioner for Article 30 and co-founder of Concord Residents for Consumer Choice (CRCC) – a grassroots advocacy group of Concord citizens looking to repeal the ban, said in a press release issued Wednesday she and other supporters are disappointed the repeal wasn’t approved.

“...This has been and continues to be an ineffective initiative that actually hurts the environment and encourages unhealthy behavior," she said. "Concord’s ban is not leading the way, we’re dragging people.”

During last year’s Town Meeting, the bylaw, banning the sale of Concord’s drinking water in single-serving polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles of 1 liter or less passed by 39 votes, 403-364, and was approved by the Attorney General’s office months later, making Concord the first town in the country to implement such a ban.

Last year’s vote was a milestone for Hill, who originally brought fourth a petition to ban bottled water in Concord in 2010. That petition passed in 2010, but couldn’t be enforced by the town because it was written as a resolution instead of a bylaw. Hill and Concord resident Jill Appel worked together to rewrite the resolution as a bylaw for Town Meeting in 2011, but that failed to pass by seven votes.

Supporters of the repeal said while they care deeply about the environment, banning the sale of bottled water takes away from their right to buy a healthy and safe beverage.

Tim Blancke, of Annursnac Hill Road, said the bottle bylaw has stripped the rights of over 15,000 Concord citizens to buy a healthy and safe beverage.

“The guise is to solve Concord’s bottled water problem,” he said. “The real reason has nothing to do with the Concord bottled water problem, rather the real reason is your rights have been trampled on to send a conservation message to the world. Taking away everyone’s rights just to send a message is a fundamentally dangerous approach. What’s next?”

Brenna Rice, a junior Concord-Carlisle High School, said the bylaw is an inconvenience.

“I care deeply about the environment,” she said. “I recycle and I use a reusable water bottle; however sometimes I forget,” she said. “This is one of the problems with the water bottle ban. In the past when I forgot my water bottle I could always buy a bottle in the vending machine but now they are full of sugary drinks such as soda.”

Kathy Granahan of Old Marlboro Road called the bylaw “very heavy handed.”

“You’ve taken away my right to choose,” she said. “How dare you do that?”

Opponents of the repeal asked residents and business owners to give the bylaw a chance.

David Clarke, of Bartlett Hill Road, said four months is not sufficient time to try out the ban.

Hill said she’s planning to write to the Board of Selectmen requesting it not allow bylaws to be challenged until they have been implemented for at least one year.

Selectman Stanly Black reminded residents the board recommended a no vote on Article 30, meaning it didn’t support the repeal. He said the bylaw just might catch on in the coming months.

“We felt, in the majority, that after three years of debate and an affirmative vote at last year’s Town Meeting, the ban deserves its day,” he said. “…Let’s give it a chance.”

Black said no lawsuits have come forth since the bylaw came into effect and that all sellers of single-serve water in town have complied with the bylaw except for Cumberland Farms.

Hill said she’s proud of her town for making the right choice and thanks all her supporters who have been there for her and Appel since the beginning.

“We’re a model for other communities,” she said. “I send my supporters my earnest gratitude. I couldn’t have done this without all their help. I’m just one person and I had a tiny army helping me do the right thing. Thank you.”

Lawyers for Boston Marathon bomber Dzkokhar Tsarnaev rested their case in his federal death penalty trial Tuesday after presenting a brief case aimed at showing his late older brother was the mastermind of the 2013 terror attack.